SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS INVOLVING LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN
COUNTRIES
The summary description of each specific trade concern was extracted from the WTO document
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.10, 11 February 2010 and its annexes.
4.
Measures related to BSE – Maintained by Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil,
Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Romania,
Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain and the United States
Raised by:
Supported by:
Dates raised:
Switzerland
May 1996 (G/SPS/R/5 and Corr.1, paras. 6-9), October 1996 ( G/SPS/R/6,
para. 53), March 1997 (G/SPS/R/7, para. 56), July 1997 (G/SPS/R/8, paras.
10-19), October 1997 (G/SPS/R/9/Rev.1, paras. 15-17), March 1998
(G/SPS/R/10, para. 9), March 1998 (G/SPS/R/14, para. 14), June 1998
(G/SPS/R/11, para. 29), September 1998 (G/SPS/R/12, paras. 26-30),
November 1998 (G/SPS/R/13, paras. 17-18), March 1999 (G/SPS/R/14, para.
8)
Relevant document(s):
G/SPS/N/AUS/56, G/SPS/N/AUS/57, G/SPS/N/CAN/18, G/SPS/N/CHL/1,
G/SPS/N/CHL/6, G/SPS/N/CHL/31,
G/SPS/N/CZE/14
and
Add.1,
G/SPS/N/SGP/1, G/SPS/W/68, G/SPS/W/79, G/SPS/GN/5, G/SPS/GEN/71
Solution:
Slovak transit ban removed, mutually satisfactory solution found with regard
to Slovak importation of Swiss milk and milk products; Chilean import
measure modified; some other measures withdrawn/revised
Status:
Resolved
Date reported as resolved: 1 March 1999
1.
In May 1996, Switzerland presented information on its BSE situation, and noted that a number of
countries had restricted imports of dairy products, although both the OIE and the WHO concluded that
dairy products posed no risk in respect of BSE. In October 1996, Switzerland provided an update of its
sanitary prescriptions, culling and veterinary measures to be adopted at the border. In March 1997,
Switzerland indicated that although it was a country of low incidence of BSE, it had been subject to a
number of BSE-related trade restrictions, some of which could not be justified under WTO rules. The
Chairman agreed to hold informal consultations with interested Members on 21 March 1997.
2.
In July 1997, Switzerland reported that although there had been some positive developments,
problems remained. Switzerland addressed some questions to the Members concerned, stressing its
interest to find rapid solutions through bilateral discussions. Argentina informed the Committee that it
had replied to Swiss questions and would provide more information; Switzerland expressed satisfaction
with this progress. Brazil noted that its import prohibition of bovine semen was based on the
classification of bovine semen as a medium risk product, and on Brazil's BSE-free status. At the
subsequent meeting of the relevant MERCOSUR working group in July 1997, Brazil would attempt to
reclassify bovine semen as low risk.
3.
Canada noted that there had been no changes to its import conditions for the importation of live
cattle, bovine embryos, bovine semen, bovine meat or meat products from Switzerland, although a draft
document on BSE policies was being discussed. Canada was receiving comments on its draft measure,
which would be in accordance with the OIE Code. Canada was concerned with the lack of quantitative or
qualitative parameters for the differentiation between countries with high and low incidence of BSE, and
re-extended an invitation for bilateral discussions.
4.
The United States stressed that it did not prohibit the importation of meat. BSE-related measures
were subject to continued review based on scientific evidence, which, for example, had led to the opening
of trade in bovine semen, although other matters remained unresolved. The United States remained open
to scientific discussion in the area. Switzerland noted that the United States required certification for
dried meat, and hoped that the reviewed US policies would be in line with OIE recommendations.
5.
Romania informed the Committee that it had held bilateral discussions with Switzerland. Its
policies were in line with OIE recommendations, and would be notified shortly. Switzerland expressed
satisfaction with the results of bilateral talks. Poland noted that imports to Poland were carried out on the
grounds of individual import permissions, but that no application had been received from Switzerland.
Switzerland requested bilateral clarifications. Singapore indicated that countries exporting beef were
required to certify BSE-freedom for six years. It believed this measure to be consistent with the SPS
Agreement, and planned to notify it shortly.
6.
The Czech Republic was concerned about continued occurrence of BSE in Switzerland,
especially since the Czech Republic was BSE-free. However, imports of bovine semen, brain and
embryos from Switzerland were not restricted. The Czech Republic would prefer to continue discussion
at the level of veterinary experts. The European Communities noted that measures were taken on a
national basis by EC member States, but were screened for conformity with EC law before being notified
to WTO. In the case of BSE, this had taken more time than expected, and although there was no common
position within the European Communities, changes to the policy were being considered. The European
Communities indicated it was going beyond OIE recommendations, and indicated that it would be useful
to continue discussions with the relevant experts.
7.
In October 1997, Switzerland indicated that its BSE-situation was improving, but that numerous
restrictions continued to affect Swiss exports of live cattle, genetic material, meat, and in certain cases
milk products. Bilateral consultations were continuing. Switzerland questioned why the Australian
quarantine requirements for the importation of bovine embryos and semen applied to Switzerland only,
and whether countries with actual BSE incidents were subject to similar requirements. Switzerland also
wondered why the objective of the new requirements was to "develop import requirements…based on
international standards", whereas the notification indicated that no international standard existed.
Australia replied that it had developed generic conditions for importation of ruminants and ruminant
genetic material from member States of the European Communities, but had established bilateral
conditions with other trading partners. The conditions in the notified draft requirements for Switzerland
were in accordance with Australia's general import policy relating to BSE promulgated in January 1995,
and were equivalent to BSE requirements for all other countries. International standards existed and
Australia did not consider that the notified draft measures deviated from such standards.
8.
Switzerland questioned why the Czech import restriction on imports of cattle over six months
applied to Switzerland only, and whether countries with actual BSE incidents were subject to similar
requirements. The Czech Republic replied that an individual import permit was required for traders
interested in importing goods subject to veterinary control, including live animals. The Czech authorities
considered the epizootic situation in the country of origin, frequency of newly found cases of contagious
diseases, efficiency of eradication programmes, etc. The import approach was always the same and
included discussion with the veterinary authorities of the country of origin. The system distinguished
between countries with sporadic positive cases and those with continued occurrence of cases, like
Switzerland. Although the measures in place in Switzerland corresponded to OIE recommendations, they
had not fully eliminated BSE-related risks, and had not prevented new infections. Unlike other countries,
Switzerland slaughtered and destroyed only BSE-affected animals, not all animals kept and fed in the
same place. Such animals could be considered as a source of disease. Trade between the Czech Republic
and the European Communities was based on EC measures which represented a higher rate of prevention
than the OIE recommendations. The Czech Republic offered to continue bilateral discussions with
Switzerland.
9.
In March 1998, Switzerland reported that most BSE-related measures against its exports
remained in place although they deviated from OIE recommendations. However, some Members had
eliminated or revised their measures, especially on genetic products. With respect to the European
Communities, Switzerland hoped that recent developments would lead to a more predictable situation. In
June 1998, Switzerland and the Slovak Republic reported on progress achieved during consultations and
in September 1998, Switzerland reported that the transit ban had been removed, although discussions on
market access for dairy products continued.
10.
In September 1998, Switzerland reiterated concerns with import prohibitions on Swiss bovine
semen, which seemed to contradict WTO provisions regarding non-discrimination, risk assessment,
notification and consultation. Switzerland was still awaiting answers to its detailed questions to the
relevant Members, or re-admission of Swiss exports. The European Communities reported on useful
bilateral contacts with Switzerland, and indicated that the European Communities was undertaking an
inventory of all national BSE-related measures in order to notify them. In addition, the European
Communities would propose that EC member States harmonize their conditions for import from
Switzerland. Chile indicated that, based on OIE recommendations on BSE, it had authorized bovine
semen imports from France and was processing a request from the United Kingdom. No official request
to export bovine semen had been received from Switzerland.
11.
In November 1998, Switzerland and the Slovak Republic reported that they were close to a shortterm solution regarding the Slovak import ban on Swiss dairy. In the longer term, a few technical issues
remained to be settled. In March 1999, Switzerland informed the Committee that a mutually satisfactory
solution regarding Slovak importation of Swiss milk and milk products had been found. Chile reported
that its measure affecting imports of bovine semen had been modified.